Vulnerable neighborhoods in the Netherlands face mounting challenges from climate change and land subsidence, threatening both infrastructure stability and residents' quality of life. Despite the urgent need for adaptation, financial stakeholders encounter persistent barriers: residents often lack the means to act, local governments face budgetary constraints, and private investors hesitate due to high perceived risks or insufficient return potential.
This research seeks to address the main question: "What are the systemic barriers faced by financial stakeholders in implementing climate adaptation measures in vulnerable neighborhoods in Dutch Cities, and how can these barriers be addressed?” To answer the research question, this thesis focuses on financial stakeholders, such as housing associations, government agencies, banks, insurers, and developers and their role in enabling or blocking climate adaptation. Using the Bloemhof neighborhood in Rotterdam as a case study, the research combines qualitative methods with a design-based approach. Bloemhof is a historically layered, socio-economically vulnerable area with severe environment-related challenges. Three alternative spatial development approaches are explored to envision climate adaptation in practice: (1) selected demolition and reconstruction, (2) modest renewal, and (3) integrated redevelopment. To test these alternatives and uncover systemic barriers, a series of interviews, a design-based session, and expert panels were conducted with financial and other related stakeholders. The findings reveal three interrelated barriers to collective adaptation: (1) at system level, national coordination is lacking, and no problem owner has been appointed to lead long-term adaptation efforts. (2) at the neighborhood level, fragmented ownership and the absence of integrated financing arrangements prevent collective action. Public and private stakeholders lack mechanisms to share the costs and benefits of adaptation. (3) at the stakeholder level, narrow mandates and institutional logics tend to reproduce the status quo, where no actor feels responsible for taking the first move. The findings of this study contribute to the debate on climate-resilient (re)development and offers recommendations for governance arrangements that support adaptation in vulnerable neighborhoods